Metagame Terastallization Tiering Discussion [ UPDATE POST #1293]

[N. Dix]

I think it's fair to say that Terastal as it is now is completely broken, for multiple reasons that were probably stated more than enough at this point, something obviously needs to be done about it.

I'm just going to say that, at least considering a restriction before an outright ban is the better thing to do, I don't think we are in a rush, and it's easily changeable later, so I'll give my opinion on all initially proposed restrictions.

1 - Showing Tera Type at Preview: It may seem like a good thing since it removes the sheer unpredictability, but I think this is still bad for the meta down the line, since it does not remove Terastal's biggest problem: the fact that every mon has access to two potentially widely different defensive type charts. This is very insanely toxic, it also leads to getting good positioning being not just difficult, but sometimes impossible. It would also not remove the fact that some offensive mons are stupidly strong at abusing Terastal, no matter how predictable it is, take Roaring Moon for example, we just know that shit is gonna Dragon Dance in front of you and Tera into a Flying Type with Acrobatics, but yet you can still easily lose, because positioning is too difficult if 6 mons can change their defensive type chart, and can also turn your good positioning into a reverse sweep.
It would eventually still lead to a chaotic metagame, where the better player may not necessarily win.

2 - Limiting the amount of Mons that can Tera: In my opinion, this is the closest we can get to a "balanced Terastal" without making it stupidly complicated for no reason. It still would have a somewhat "random factor", but it's definetly way less oppressive, good positioning can still be overturned, but is less of a threat over the course of a game, a defensive mon can still choose a better typing to change into to wall a bigger part of the meta, but you also don't have to worry about every single one of them turning your great match-up into a game that you can't win anymore because it removed your win condition.
As to how it should be implemented, the questions you should ask are:
- Do you choose the mon you want to Tera at Preview, or do you choose that in the Builder ?
- If you do choose them in the Builder, how should this be implemented ? Just by having a button or by having a Clause that makes it so only the first mon of a team can Tera ?
- How many of them should be able to Tera ? One, maybe two ?

3 - Limiting to Same-Type Tera: This is honestly silly, as it only really nerfs defensive mons who generally don't want to use Same-Type Tera, but something to cover bad match-ups, bringing the offensive ones basically less answers, things like Specs Iron Valiant already use Same-Type Tera to sometimes an insane degree, spamming an Adaptability Moonblast that almost has no true switch-in. This would ruin a balance between offense and defense.

4 - Banning Tera Blast: The answer to that is simple, no. Tera Blast is not a move that a lot of mons run in the first place because you don't even know if you are going to Tera that mon in particular, you're generally gonna prefer overall better coverage, banning Tera Blast would basically have no real influence on the meta, to the point where its probably better to not do anything.

So out of the 4, I see Restriction #2 as the better solution, but it also needs clarifications as to how it should work.
Realistically, even that could be prove to be too much for the metagame to handle, which in when we could outright ban the mechanic.

There's also the proposition of "Useless Item Tera".

2) Useless Item Tera: You must be holding a specific (useless) item, eg Tart Apple, to Tera.

And while I really like this just meta-wise, it's really not intuitive for a first time player which might get lost and might quit as a result, which I don't think is a wanted effect of just trying to fix a broken mechanic, we probably should keep it as simple and straight to the point as possible.

So, TL;DR: I think we should look into restricting Terastal first, and then if it proves to be too much, we ban it. I think limiting the amount of mons that can Tera in a team is the best way we can balance this broken mess while keeping it simple.

 

[Dreadfury]

DISCLAIMER: this is a slightly-modified copy/paste from an extensive post I made on r/stunfisk (which as a subreddit is EXTREMELY pro-Tera, much to my dismay). A little bit of stuff I discuss here may be a little dated since it's been a couple days since then (i.e. Palafin and Bundle have been banned), but the main idea behind this absolute essay of a post is still there:

Terastalization can be a fun mechanic, but I am so heavily in the pro-ban camp it isn't even funny. This whole thing is giving off enormous Dynamax vibes and a lot of the logic folks are using to justify keeping Terastalization around right now is quickly starting to echo the logic I used to see regarding Dynamax or BW's broken-checking-broken philosophy. And, well... we know how both of those generations went.

From a fun perspective, it's a cool new addition, but what I think everyone needs to realize is that something can be fun and still go against what Smogon tiering is trying to accomplish (trying to create as competitive an environment as possible using almost exclusively what can be utilized in-game). The ability to arbitrarily change your entire defensive typing and either add a third (second, in fringe cases) STAB or beef up one of your existing STABs goes against a lot of what competitive play has been trying to establish for a long time.

• Checks and counters become significantly less-defined than they've been in most metagames, and in too many cases the concept of opportunity cost is all but flushed down the drain.
• Mons with clear flaws holding them back like their limited movepools or poor defensive/offensive typings suddenly getting any type coverage of their choice and/or any defensive monotyping of their choice. This, of course, heavily favors offensive stuff, not unlike how Z-Moves, Gems, and Dynamax heavily favored sweepers that were already strong on their own.
• It's a mechanic that HEAVILY favors offense, to the point where "just banning its best abusers" doesn't work anymore. BW trying this with Gems would've ended up seeing Latios, Cloyster, Volcarona, Dragonite, Breloom, and much more banned and would've ended up with a meta where a new laundry list of Gem abusers would become problematic and need to get banned. There are a few purely-defensive Tera abusers (see: Ghost-Tera Garganacl, or Fairy-Tera Skeledirge) that use it purely defensively as opposed to a defensive stopgap to open up continued offensive pressure (think Annihilape or DD users that prefer Steel over DNite's Normal/Roaring Moon's Flying), but they're few and far between.
• The fact that many teams can run numerous possibly-good Terastalization abusers on the same team just makes the whole game an even bigger guessing game than it already was. Tera isn't just "oh, this thing's my opponent's Tera-Steel user" even now; it's "my opponent is running three or four Tera abusers, each of them can abuse three different Tera types defensively and/or offensively, they can each completely flip matchups upside-down, and my opponent can decide to do this every single turn." Dynamax did this to a far more extreme extent. Z-Moves and Gems did this to a lesser extent since both were one-time uses and Z-Moves have a considerable opportunity cost attached to them. Yet we have precedent for BW's Gems being excessive now, as that element helped make BW OU arguably the most hated OU meta of all time by its own playerbase (read: not to be conflated with RBY and GSC, which generally tend to be liked by their playerbases but disliked by outsiders).

I had a stance regarding Z-Moves in the original version of this, but I'm not sure I entirely agree with that original stance upon rereading this. I think SM OU is very much a "broken checking broken" meta and I think Z-Moves enabled some really weird interactions that I don't think should've existed (i.e. Z-Dig Greninja), but despite SM OU being a divisive tier and one I can't really look back upon too fondly there are still some actually-notable SM players that liked the tier.

Now, before anyone comes at me with the whole "but no Team Preview makes for much more guessing and that's considered healthy in Gens 1-4" argument, please understand that this isn't an argument.

• Gen 1 OU has a bare minimum of three almost completely predetermined mons on both teams (Chansey, Tauros, and Snorlax, and arguably Rhydon or the rare Golem to keep Zapdos in check) and those big three mons only have their sets (numerous sets, granted) to distinguish themselves. Each of those mons would be quickban worthy in a modern OU metagame.
• Gen 2 OU teams have Snorlax on them. If they do not, they are shit Gen 2 OU teams, no exception. Yes, Lax has numerous sets as well and all of them are elite, but you know there's a Snorlax on that team. You also know that there's an Electric, and probably Cloyster, on those teams too. Yet even the Snorlax - the big threat, that you know exists and that has numerous sets you have to worry about - can be checked through passive damage, consistent offensive pressure, and cores that don't have to fear Fire Blast and EQ. The mons that check each Lax set are very set-in-stone, and those have more specific teammates. You see one or two mons and the relatively small list of good OU mons is small enough that you can discern stuff more easily.
• Gen 3 has a fair bit more diversity, but the Dex is once again limited enough in sheer offense that defensive counterplay to the limited number of strong offensive threats is very high. Swampert has enough room to breathe to be able to handle DD Mence and DD Tyranitar, and while it folds to HP Grass lure sets those mons have to give up a LOT to run HP Grass. Same deal with Fire coverage vs. Skarmory; there's an opportunity cost to running Fire coverage in that meta. These mons have opportunity cost to them. They can beat some checks and counters, but they have to give up a lot to pull that off. They're great mons because they can do it, but they have clear limits.
• In Gen 4, Infernape lacks the sheer power to complement its coverage, Lucario is slow and has extreme 4MSS, TTar is truly excellent but isn't the top dog with so many Fighting-types and Jirachi being around anymore (although it's solidly #2). Offense cannot cover everything all at once, hence why Stall is such a legitimate playstyle in DPP.
• And, most importantly, we don't have five generations' worth of baseline powercreep going on in those generations. Toxapex laughs at the Stalls of yesteryear. Skeledirge, Dondozo, and Clodsire relentlessly mock the Quagsires and Unaware Clefables of old. Annihilape singlehandedly gave us a good physical Ghost-type move and that move is borderline gamebreakingly good and only really held back by Ape's poor defensive typing and the fact that we figure something new out regarding Rage Fist on a seemingly-daily basis to this day. Gen 9 Salamence has an item to make itself immune to the Stealth Rock that chipped the banned Gen 4 Salamence significantly, even better Flying coverage than base 70 HP Flying, and a snowballing ability with Moxie, and that thing's not even a top Dragon Dancer nowadays because Multiscale Dragonite, Baxcalibur, Dragapult, and Roaring Moon at the bare minimum make it look like shit by comparison. Volcarona's an even bigger matchup fish in more recent gens than it's historically been thanks to Pex and (outside of this gen) Heatran coexisting alongside it. Lucario is a complete joke in OU and has been since Gen 5, and the once-ironclad defenses of Swampert just can't hold modern OU metagames together like they used to even despite receiving a huge buff through Flip Turn last gen. You don't have shit in Gen 3/4 OU that can wreck your shit if you misplay once because you guessed their Tera typing wrong and got clowned on. And in many of these cases, the power levels or the defensive typings granted by Terastalization are what's making these things so deadly.

If you think it's a fun mechanic, more power to you. I like some of the set variety it brings at times. But I really, genuinely don't know how anyone can pretend Terastalization is somehow a recipe for a healthy metagame and that "banning all the good Tera abusers" is possibly going to address the very real issue of Tera being the reason why they're so ridiculous in the first place. And it's only going to get crazier and crazier as people continue to innovate with it and it'll become increasingly unpredictable, especially at higher levels of play.

Terastalization really can be fun, but it's an absolute dumpster fire from a competitive standpoint and it just gets less and less fair as time passes. I'm down to try a Tera clause of sorts (one mon on the team can use it and that Tera typing has to be disclosed), but I still don't think it'll be enough long-term. If we start having to ban several mons from the tier and their ability to abuse Terastalization is what's cited as a reason for them being too much for the tier, it'll be pretty blatantly clear by that point that the only solution is to ban the mechanic as a whole. For instance, I don't think Dragapult is problematic on its own and we have evidence of this in SS OU where it very rarely got away with physical sets compared to its excellent Specs set, but the existence of Tera Blast as a consistent physical Ghost-STAB move on it is, but I don't think Annihilape is too unmanageable unless it can arbitrarily decide to become a Water-type (or a Fairy-type; I think that's a bit more unexplored currently), get rid of its numerous exploitable weaknesses with no warning, and proceed to live hits that fuel Rage Fist and turn it into an unstoppable killing machine. These are two very different mons that have very real potential to become too threatening for OU exclusively because they abuse the same arguably-uncompetitive mechanic in completely different ways. One mon abuses Tera Blast as a STAB move it never had (which is almost entirely unique to Dragapult as most mons won't use Tera Blast all that often if at all), and the other abuses Terastalization as a defensive stopgap to opposing offense (as is the case with the vast majority of Tera abusers, hence why I think banning Tera Blast does nothing).

TL;DR: I'm heavily in favor of banning Terastalization outright without looking back, but I think it's more fair to restrict it heavily by limiting it to one mon on the team and having that one mon's Tera-typing be disclosed from the very beginning of a game. If (or, rather, when) that proves to be inadequate, the only logical approach would be to just ban Terastalization in its entirety in an effort to preserve as many individual Gen 9 mons as possible and evaluate them based on what they and they alone can do, without the aid of something as volatile as Terastalization. Leaving the mechanic untouched is completely off the table, in my opinion.

 

[ThitOneGuy]

Audino sucked. MegaBro did not. It had an actual decent place. As for defensive tera, it could see actual use if teams were limited to one tera mon. Pokemon like Slowbro/king, Skeledirge, Dondozo and in general, specific pokemon on bulkier teams that can use Tera to better the range of what they check, easing the burden on teambuilding.

As for me, my biggest issue with Terastalize as a whole is how it can invalidate the concept of skillful building and the idea of mon checks mon. Let's say you bring Breloom. Its mach punch helps keep in check a number of powerful prominent threats right now, and its bullet seed provides strong wallbreaking more defensive pokemon (loaded dice sets especially). So you pack Breloom to be a check to Chi-Yu, Chien-Pao, Kingambit, Roaring Moon and a general way to pick off weakened boosting threats. This lets you focus on other areas of building to cover other parts of the metagame (and you can substitute a scarfer aa an offensive check for any of these threats). But all the mons Breloom checked can suddenly flip the script with a tera type and invalidate that match up. Roaring Moon becomes a flying type and sets up a DD to sweep. Chien-Pao becomes a ghost type to dodge mach punch and kill it back (or SD and then sweep afterwards). Chi-Yu picks ghost or a fighting resist and proceeds to KO Loom. And now your team is now seriously on the backfoot, through no fault of your own.

Some may try and argue "well you should know better" because of "meta trends", but where are you supposed to fit counterplay for both base mon and also tera forms, while also checking other big stuff (and their accompanying tera types)? And then X mon teras into something else to beat what you brought for their supposedly common tera? We've seen previously banned mons like Palafin and Bundle sometimes use tera to turn checks into opportunity. Bulk Up Palafin steel tera turning Amoonguss and Clodsire into set up fodder (while also turning a servicable check like Loom into a noncheck too). I've seen some also say "well get them to burn their tera use early" or "you can use tera too" and the former is not really consistently reliable while the latter is very reactive rather than based on teambuilding or playing skill. All of this is without talking about the 50/50 situations you can be put into as a result of the mechanic, and unlike Z moves or any sudden surprises like resist berries, terastilize has a lasting impact all game you must account for on six pokemon during battle.

So to close my post out, a player should be rewarded for good teambuilding and good playing during battle, and terastilize as it is doesn't really work for either of these I feel. If it worked the way we once thought where it actually had a cost (losing old stabs and only having tera type as stab), it would probably be a lot more reasonable and nuanced. But as it is right now, Terastilize in its current state is not balancer and I woupd argue is not competitive

Both of those defensive megas were significantly worse than the offensive options, because they lack the immediate threat of mons like Mega Zard Y, or Mega Lucario, who could end the game on the spot if used at the right time. Defensive megas are worse than offensive ones. Limiting it to one Tera that you choose at team-building will just gut the mechanic and leave it better off banned imo.

If Breloom is your only check for those mons, run it with a Tera type that can check their common ones. For example, Tera Rock with Rock Tomb would allow Breloom to stop Flying RM, and still threatens Steel RM with Mach Punch. Rock would also be useful against that Chien Pao, and let you hit it decently hard with Bullet Seed. Chi Yu also has issues with Rock Tera Breloom. My point is that a Breloom with a Tera type that was chosen considering these things can still absolutely beat the things you brought it to check.

What you bring for their Tera types are your own Tera types. Meta trends would show the common types used for these mons, while also highlighting their potential workarounds. Let's go back to the Breloom and RM example for a moment. You have a Tera Rock Breloom with Mach Punch, Bullet Seed, Rock Tomb, and whatever 4th move, holding Life Orb. RM could either be the Steel Tera set or the Flying Tera set. You look at their team and expect them to be Tera Flying, so you Tera into Rock, only for them to be Steel and you lose your Breloom. You then go into one of your defensive mons that check it, but are on the back foot. You're on the back foot for a call you made that was wrong, because the opponent built their team to do that. That's not the mechanic being broken or unbalanced, it's someone building a team to bait their opponents into a move that helps them. Something you are equally able to do.

Whether or not Terastalization helps you entirely depends on your teambuilding and how you use it. It's far more balanced than something like Dynamax ever was. Terastalizing is something you need to build your team around and with, and with how complex of a mechanic it is, we don't have enough information to warrant a ban on it yet IMHO.

 

[Reviews2D]

Both of those defensive megas were significantly worse than the offensive options, because they lack the immediate threat of mons like Mega Zard Y, or Mega Lucario, who could end the game on the spot if used at the right time. Defensive megas are worse than offensive ones. Limiting it to one Tera that you choose at team-building will just gut the mechanic and leave it better off banned imo.

If Breloom is your only check for those mons, run it with a Tera type that can check their common ones. For example, Tera Rock with Rock Tomb would allow Breloom to stop Flying RM, and still threatens Steel RM with Mach Punch. Rock would also be useful against that Chien Pao, and let you hit it decently hard with Bullet Seed. Chi Yu also has issues with Rock Tera Breloom. My point is that a Breloom with a Tera type that was chosen considering these things can still absolutely beat the things you brought it to check.

What you bring for their Tera types are your own Tera types. Meta trends would show the common types used for these mons, while also highlighting their potential workarounds. Let's go back to the Breloom and RM example for a moment. You have a Tera Rock Breloom with Mach Punch, Bullet Seed, Rock Tomb, and whatever 4th move, holding Life Orb. RM could either be the Steel Tera set or the Flying Tera set. You look at their team and expect them to be Tera Flying, so you Tera into Rock, only for them to be Steel and you lose your Breloom. You then go into one of your defensive mons that check it, but are on the back foot. You're on the back foot for a call you made that was wrong, because the opponent built their team to do that. That's not the mechanic being broken or unbalanced, it's someone building a team to bait their opponents into a move that helps them. Something you are equally able to do.

Whether or not Terastalization helps you entirely depends on your teambuilding and how you use it. It's far more balanced than something like Dynamax ever was. Terastalizing is something you need to build your team around and with, and with how complex of a mechanic it is, we don't have enough information to warrant a ban on it yet IMHO.

Abusing the mechanic to check another mon abusing the same mechanic does not make it balanced or healthy. Having to do so shows how oppressive it is and the lack of counter play. On a different note I would like to make nothing wants to run life orb anymore, the recoil has become undesired due to the lack of longevity it gives the user, especially in a hazard heavy meta.

 

[charlieX7]

In a stable meta, you know it's almost certainly packing a Z crystal and Zapdos can handle it once he's in; you messed up to be put in this position, but click Roost and the worst case scenario is that he attacks, you bring in Zapdos, and he either switches out or dies to Discharge. In a chaotic meta, maybe he's actually Mega Gyarados with Waterfall and Moxie, clicks the Mega only after Skarmorny dies, and now he can take the Discharge before killing with a +1 Crunch, so now you've lost two pokemon instead of one. At least Tangrowth can take a +1 Mega Gyarados and stop the bleeding...

...Terastalization is like that. People are still using inferior sets that are threatening solely because they're unexpected, but once the better sets are identified, Team Chaos takes a back seat and team building will be much more predictable. You'll still get surprised by novelties, but as long as it's a rare surprise rather than an every game occurrence, that's part of the game.

This post consummately summarizes the anti-ban point. Terastallization's main problem, as of now, is its ability to change a mon's capabilities to something completely different at the relative snap of a finger. This allows for "surprise" sets that can catch an opponent off-guard, or perhaps sets that can even bypass all of a team's defensive capabilities.

It's been 8 days since SV released (as I'm writing this), so the meta hasn't settled completely yet. Teams can have a wide range of styles and mons, unlike what you may see in a more centralized meta such as gen8 (Landorus had 52% usage lol) or gen1. Consider the similarities between Terastallization and Z-moves. Both allow the user to drastically change their abilities as Pokemon or roles in their teams within a single turn. At the (very) beginning of gen7, the meta was so decentralized that Z-moves could show up out of nowhere and allow a Pokemon to deal damage to something it shouldn't be able to.

Let's say you have an Iron Valiant up against Chien-Pao. Last mon on both sides. Your opponent hasn't terastallized yet. Logically (and empirically), the Tera type that Chien-Pao has should be able to cancel/reverse its glaring Fighting weakness. There's little reason to believe that, unless Chien-Pao is running a gimmicky (and therefore likely nonoptimal) set, it would run a Tera type solely devoted to getting rid of the Fairy weakness.

This may derive from my inexperience with high ladder this generation, but Terastallization has, at its most, either:

a. allowed a bulky mon to survive longer (frick you garganacl),​

​

b. allowed a sweeper to gain coverage against offensive weaknesses, or​

​

c. allowed a sweeper to get an extra turn or two off on a potential threat.​

​

Terastallization is often played in reckless or shortsighted fashion. Terastallizing your Gholdengo to kill a Garchomp will end up killing you when your opponent hits you with Tera-Water Annihilape. The meta of Tera types has yet to settle, but so too has the meta of how to use Tera.

In conclusion, this generation is undeniably one of the most power-crept gens ever, sitting maybe to SwSh only. As a direct result, the volatility of Terastallization, along with the rest of the metagame, is at what is nearly certainly a peak. It's quite literally just over a week since the game released. Terastallization may end up being overpowered and uncontrollable. However, it is FAR too early to make such a (literally) game-changing decision. If the settled metagame ends up being irredeemable with Tera, I'm sure almost all of the playerbase will agree with a ban or restriction. However, the game is yet too fresh to decide about this. So my stance on the issue is to hold off on a ban until the metagame settles.

 

[ThitOneGuy]

DISCLAIMER: this is a slightly-modified copy/paste from an extensive post I made on r/stunfisk (which as a subreddit is EXTREMELY pro-Tera, much to my dismay). A little bit of stuff I discuss here may be a little dated since it's been a couple days since then (i.e. Palafin and Bundle have been banned), but the main idea behind this absolute essay of a post is still there:

Terastalization can be a fun mechanic, but I am so heavily in the pro-ban camp it isn't even funny. This whole thing is giving off enormous Dynamax vibes and a lot of the logic folks are using to justify keeping Terastalization around right now is quickly starting to echo the logic I used to see regarding Dynamax or BW's broken-checking-broken philosophy. And, well... we know how both of those generations went.

From a fun perspective, it's a cool new addition, but what I think everyone needs to realize is that something can be fun and still go against what Smogon tiering is trying to accomplish (trying to create as competitive an environment as possible using almost exclusively what can be utilized in-game). The ability to arbitrarily change your entire defensive typing and either add a third (second, in fringe cases) STAB or beef up one of your existing STABs goes against a lot of what competitive play has been trying to establish for a long time.

• Checks and counters become significantly less-defined than they've been in most metagames, and in too many cases the concept of opportunity cost is all but flushed down the drain.
• Mons with clear flaws holding them back like their limited movepools or poor defensive/offensive typings suddenly getting any type coverage of their choice and/or any defensive monotyping of their choice. This, of course, heavily favors offensive stuff, not unlike how Z-Moves, Gems, and Dynamax heavily favored sweepers that were already strong on their own.
• It's a mechanic that HEAVILY favors offense, to the point where "just banning its best abusers" doesn't work anymore. BW trying this with Gems would've ended up seeing Latios, Cloyster, Volcarona, Dragonite, Breloom, and much more banned and would've ended up with a meta where a new laundry list of Gem abusers would become problematic and need to get banned. There are a few purely-defensive Tera abusers (see: Ghost-Tera Garganacl, or Fairy-Tera Skeledirge) that use it purely defensively as opposed to a defensive stopgap to open up continued offensive pressure (think Annihilape or DD users that prefer Steel over DNite's Normal/Roaring Moon's Flying), but they're few and far between.
• The fact that many teams can run numerous possibly-good Terastalization abusers on the same team just makes the whole game an even bigger guessing game than it already was. Tera isn't just "oh, this thing's my opponent's Tera-Steel user" even now; it's "my opponent is running three or four Tera abusers, each of them can abuse three different Tera types defensively and/or offensively, they can each completely flip matchups upside-down, and my opponent can decide to do this every single turn." Dynamax did this to a far more extreme extent. Z-Moves and Gems did this to a lesser extent since both were one-time uses and Z-Moves have a considerable opportunity cost attached to them. Yet we have precedent for BW's Gems being excessive now, as that element helped make BW OU arguably the most hated OU meta of all time by its own playerbase (read: not to be conflated with RBY and GSC, which generally tend to be liked by their playerbases but disliked by outsiders).

I had a stance regarding Z-Moves in the original version of this, but I'm not sure I entirely agree with that original stance upon rereading this. I think SM OU is very much a "broken checking broken" meta and I think Z-Moves enabled some really weird interactions that I don't think should've existed (i.e. Z-Dig Greninja), but despite SM OU being a divisive tier and one I can't really look back upon too fondly there are still some actually-notable SM players that liked the tier.

Now, before anyone comes at me with the whole "but no Team Preview makes for much more guessing and that's considered healthy in Gens 1-4" argument, please understand that this isn't an argument.

• Gen 1 OU has a bare minimum of three almost completely predetermined mons on both teams (Chansey, Tauros, and Snorlax, and arguably Rhydon or the rare Golem to keep Zapdos in check) and those big three mons only have their sets (numerous sets, granted) to distinguish themselves. Each of those mons would be quickban worthy in a modern OU metagame.
• Gen 2 OU teams have Snorlax on them. If they do not, they are shit Gen 2 OU teams, no exception. Yes, Lax has numerous sets as well and all of them are elite, but you know there's a Snorlax on that team. You also know that there's an Electric, and probably Cloyster, on those teams too. Yet even the Snorlax - the big threat, that you know exists and that has numerous sets you have to worry about - can be checked through passive damage, consistent offensive pressure, and cores that don't have to fear Fire Blast and EQ. The mons that check each Lax set are very set-in-stone, and those have more specific teammates. You see one or two mons and the relatively small list of good OU mons is small enough that you can discern stuff more easily.
• Gen 3 has a fair bit more diversity, but the Dex is once again limited enough in sheer offense that defensive counterplay to the limited number of strong offensive threats is very high. Swampert has enough room to breathe to be able to handle DD Mence and DD Tyranitar, and while it folds to HP Grass lure sets those mons have to give up a LOT to run HP Grass. Same deal with Fire coverage vs. Skarmory; there's an opportunity cost to running Fire coverage in that meta. These mons have opportunity cost to them. They can beat some checks and counters, but they have to give up a lot to pull that off. They're great mons because they can do it, but they have clear limits.
• In Gen 4, Infernape lacks the sheer power to complement its coverage, Lucario is slow and has extreme 4MSS, TTar is truly excellent but isn't the top dog with so many Fighting-types and Jirachi being around anymore (although it's solidly #2). Offense cannot cover everything all at once, hence why Stall is such a legitimate playstyle in DPP.
• And, most importantly, we don't have five generations' worth of baseline powercreep going on in those generations. Toxapex laughs at the Stalls of yesteryear. Skeledirge, Dondozo, and Clodsire relentlessly mock the Quagsires and Unaware Clefables of old. Annihilape singlehandedly gave us a good physical Ghost-type move and that move is borderline gamebreakingly good and only really held back by Ape's poor defensive typing and the fact that we figure something new out regarding Rage Fist on a seemingly-daily basis to this day. Gen 9 Salamence has an item to make itself immune to the Stealth Rock that chipped the banned Gen 4 Salamence significantly, even better Flying coverage than base 70 HP Flying, and a snowballing ability with Moxie, and that thing's not even a top Dragon Dancer nowadays because Multiscale Dragonite, Baxcalibur, Dragapult, and Roaring Moon at the bare minimum make it look like shit by comparison. Volcarona's an even bigger matchup fish in more recent gens than it's historically been thanks to Pex and (outside of this gen) Heatran coexisting alongside it. Lucario is a complete joke in OU and has been since Gen 5, and the once-ironclad defenses of Swampert just can't hold modern OU metagames together like they used to even despite receiving a huge buff through Flip Turn last gen. You don't have shit in Gen 3/4 OU that can wreck your shit if you misplay once because you guessed their Tera typing wrong and got clowned on. And in many of these cases, the power levels or the defensive typings granted by Terastalization are what's making these things so deadly.

If you think it's a fun mechanic, more power to you. I like some of the set variety it brings at times. But I really, genuinely don't know how anyone can pretend Terastalization is somehow a recipe for a healthy metagame and that "banning all the good Tera abusers" is possibly going to address the very real issue of Tera being the reason why they're so ridiculous in the first place. And it's only going to get crazier and crazier as people continue to innovate with it and it'll become increasingly unpredictable, especially at higher levels of play.

Terastalization really can be fun, but it's an absolute dumpster fire from a competitive standpoint and it just gets less and less fair as time passes. I'm down to try a Tera clause of sorts (one mon on the team can use it and that Tera typing has to be disclosed), but I still don't think it'll be enough long-term. If we start having to ban several mons from the tier and their ability to abuse Terastalization is what's cited as a reason for them being too much for the tier, it'll be pretty blatantly clear by that point that the only solution is to ban the mechanic as a whole. For instance, I don't think Dragapult is problematic on its own and we have evidence of this in SS OU where it very rarely got away with physical sets compared to its excellent Specs set, but the existence of Tera Blast as a consistent physical Ghost-STAB move on it is, but I don't think Annihilape is too unmanageable unless it can arbitrarily decide to become a Water-type (or a Fairy-type; I think that's a bit more unexplored currently), get rid of its numerous exploitable weaknesses with no warning, and proceed to live hits that fuel Rage Fist and turn it into an unstoppable killing machine. These are two very different mons that have very real potential to become too threatening for OU exclusively because they abuse the same arguably-uncompetitive mechanic in completely different ways. One mon abuses Tera Blast as a STAB move it never had (which is almost entirely unique to Dragapult as most mons won't use Tera Blast all that often if at all), and the other abuses Terastalization as a defensive stopgap to opposing offense (as is the case with the vast majority of Tera abusers, hence why I think banning Tera Blast does nothing).

TL;DR: I'm heavily in favor of banning Terastalization outright without looking back, but I think it's more fair to restrict it heavily by limiting it to one mon on the team and having that one mon's Tera-typing be disclosed from the very beginning of a game. If (or, rather, when) that proves to be inadequate, the only logical approach would be to just ban Terastalization in its entirety in an effort to preserve as many individual Gen 9 mons as possible and evaluate them based on what they and they alone can do, without the aid of something as volatile as Terastalization. Leaving the mechanic untouched is completely off the table, in my opinion.

Terastalization, unlike Dynamax, doesn't really become an instant win button unless you were already winning. What it does do is open up a much more varied metagame that hasn't had time to develop at all. Dynamax gave you what amounted to 3 Z moves, insane bulk, and free setup on any mon you wanted. Playing around Dynamax doesn't really work unless your position is so dominant that you can afford to lose half your team and still be on top.

Most strong pokemon will have like 1-2 types that they aren't already that would be good on them, with their checks having more simply because they're needing to check more options, so defensively they have more options. Offensive mons don't tend to have many good Tera options. RM has STAB types, Flying, and Steel. Annhilape has basically just Water and Fairy. Having the check you use for them able to Tera into a type that can handle both their main Tera types isn't that hard. Tera gives you just as many defensive ways around it as it does offensive uses of it.

I agree that the "no team preview gets existing" thing isn't actually an argument at all. Those gens are too different to the current ones to compare. Powercreep has left modern Pokémon making Gen 1's titans of power relegated to tiers below UU. The game is much more volatile than it was back then, and is more varied because of that.

Banning the abusers of Tera won't do much, because there aren't a ton of mons that actually abuse it. As the meta progresses and people get a feel for the mechanic, the ways to use it will become clear, but right now we don't know enough about how best to use it, offensively or defensively, to really tell if it's broken. What I do know is that Dynamax is the worst balanced for singles a gimmick has ever been.

I don't think the mons you listed really abuse the mechanic at all. Dragapult getting a base 80 power physical Ghost move doesn't really help much, when its physical movepool is so limited. Plus it stays weak to Sucker Punch. A banded Tera Ghost set would probably be worse than a specs set, since if you end up needing your Tera elsewhere, Pult is suddenly down a moveslot. If you blow the Tera too fast, it can leave you on the back foot, since your opponent would then know your team's tricks. Annhilape can use it for a better defensive typing, but that doesn't stop it from dying to a strong offensive mon. It needs to be saved for the right time to be used. Neither of these options let you just win the way Dynamax did. Dynamax you brought a setup mon in on a bulky one who couldn't handle it, Swords Danced, then went for Airstream 3 times, or threw in some weather, and then swept. Dynamax you barely had to think about when to use it. Terastalization adds a lot to the game, and banning it now would be premature.

I do not think Terastalization needs to be banned or restricted. Showing the types is the only restriction that's preferable to an outright ban. The other ones either don't do anything(banning Terablast) or do too much and leave the mechanic as an empty shell(limiting it to one you have to select at teambuilding, only STAB Teras). If we do go the nuclear option, ideally I'd want a split OU, one with Tera, one without.

 

[Lord Xen III]

What you bring for their Tera types are your own Tera types. Meta trends would show the common types used for these mons, while also highlighting their potential workarounds. Let's go back to the Breloom and RM example for a moment. You have a Tera Rock Breloom with Mach Punch, Bullet Seed, Rock Tomb, and whatever 4th move, holding Life Orb. RM could either be the Steel Tera set or the Flying Tera set. You look at their team and expect them to be Tera Flying, so you Tera into Rock, only for them to be Steel and you lose your Breloom. You then go into one of your defensive mons that check it, but are on the back foot. You're on the back foot for a call you made that was wrong, because the opponent built their team to do that. That's not the mechanic being broken or unbalanced, it's someone building a team to bait their opponents into a move that helps them. Something you are equally able to do.

This sounds uncompetitive:


II.) Uncompetitive - elements that reduce the effect of player choice / interaction on the end result to an extreme degree, such that "more skillful play" is almost always rendered irrelevant.

• This can be matchup related; think the determination that Baton Pass took the battling skill aspect out of the player's hands and made it overwhelmingly a team matchup issue, where even the best moves made each time by a standard team often were not enough.

Basically the outcome seems heavily decided by the choice of tera type rather than skill, as it doesn't matter whether the breeloom player has skillfully assessed the option of using Tera-Rock for Breeloom in the teambuilder, or has skillfully preserved and positioned their breeloom to check the threats. They can bring Tera-Rock Loom and still lose to the stuff Breeloom is supposed to check, with no way of telling in advance.
Tera allows those things to keep their original stab power, so no opportunity cost lost, while adding new defensive utility and an extra stab to power through stuff without losing out on much.

 

[ThitOneGuy]

Abusing the mechanic to check another mon abusing the same mechanic does not make it balanced or healthy. Having to do so shows how oppressive it is and the lack of counter play. On a different note I would like to make nothing wants to run life orb anymore, the recoil has become undesired due to the lack of longevity it gives the user, especially in a hazard heavy meta.

In what way is building your check to be able to check the mon abusing a mechanic? This is a pretty basic way to use it, and one that can be seen from a mile away. The fact that you can build a pokemon to check certain mons and their Tera types by using your own is not abusing it. It's a mechanic designed to be used both offensively and defensively. It comes down to who uses their tools better. In that same Breloom vs RM scenario, if you read it to be a Steel Tera you can preserve your own Tera and KO with Mach Punch. You don't need to use Tera to beat Tera, you just need to have an idea what types a pokemon are good at using, and what types help the team most, both things we'd get better at as the meta develops.

 

[A_Wild_Noob_Appeared!]

Sleep Clause has been brought up fairly frequently, and I really don't think it's a good idea to bring it up to justify modifying mechanics (or applying complicated but technically cart-enforceable procedures which basically change Tera functionality). The Sleep Clause mod isn't on the sturdiest ground itself (it's old and it's mostly just carried by tradition at this point), and the potential issues with applying such modifications (or technically cart-enforceable "mods") to the generational gimmick would be so much greater.

What would happen if Sleep Clause was changed to the "technically cart-enforceable" version where you instantly lose if you sleep a second Pokemon? It'd make very little difference. What would happen if sleep-inducing moves were completely banned? Pokemon who commonly use sleep moves would fall in viability, but as of Gens 6 - 8, single-target sleep is weak enough that it's not a massive viability drop (probably by 1 tier at most in most cases). This would cause a ripple effect and shake up tiers a bit, but tiers would still be fairly recognizable afterwards. Basically, the "Sleep Clause" metagame is not massively different from the "complete Sleep ban metagame", which makes the modding not quite as egregious.

On the other hand, the Tera mechanics affect pretty much every offensive Pokemon, so each of the different variations on Tera restrictions produces a drastically different game. The "no restrictions" metagame, the "only STAB Tera" metagame, and the "dedicated Terastylizer" metagame are all completely different from each other (and of course, completely different from the "Tera is banned" metagame). Nothing aside from "no restrictions" (and perhaps "Tera type preview", which changes the least) comes even close to preserving the mechanic as its "supposed" to work. Not to mention all of the other proposals that have been made, which kinda shows why complex bans/"modding" are generally discouraged.

Ultimately, I think that a complete ban on Terastylization is likely the best decision. I agree with a lot of what has been said about the mechanic's balance in its current state; I don't have much to add. I think that implementing partial restrictions would be problematic for the aforementioned reasons, so much so that I'd almost rather just let it stay unchanged if it's not going to be fully banned.

 

[yuruuu]

Everything that's not in the game should not be an option. Showing your opponent's tera type at team preview is going against game mechanics, and should not be considered. Limiting Pokemon that can terastallize also seems like an unclean solution, since if they're broken after terastallizing then the Pokemon should be banned, not the mechanic. Restricting types is also going against game mechanics and also overly complicated.

Either ban it completely or not at all.

 

[ThitOneGuy]

This sounds uncompetitive:


II.) Uncompetitive - elements that reduce the effect of player choice / interaction on the end result to an extreme degree, such that "more skillful play" is almost always rendered irrelevant.

• This can be matchup related; think the determination that Baton Pass took the battling skill aspect out of the player's hands and made it overwhelmingly a team matchup issue, where even the best moves made each time by a standard team often were not enough.

Basically the outcome seems heavily decided by the choice of tera type rather than skill, as it doesn't matter whether the breeloom player has skillfully assessed the option of using Tera-Rock for Breeloom in the teambuilder, or has skillfully preserved and positioned their breeloom to check the threats. They can bring Tera-Rock Loom and still lose to the stuff Breeloom is supposed to check, with no way of telling in advance.
Tera allows those things to keep their original stab power, so no opportunity cost lost, while adding new defensive utility and an extra stab to power through stuff without losing out on much.

Terastalizing is something you can build your team around by selecting more optimal Tera types. Teambuilding is part of player skill. If someone builds a better team than you, that's a skill issue on your end. For the Breloom example, the player that chose to run a set on their mon to bait in and beat Tera Rock Breloom outplayed the Breloom player. They built a team to deal with things, called the Breloom player on the right turn, and got rewarded for it. There is no step of this that the more skilled player can't play around. Rock isn't the only type that can do what I brought up Rock for on Breloom. They could've picked another type, like Electric, for example, or they could've scouted for the Tera type by running a move like Protect in the 4th slot.

Nothing in the scenario I gave is remotely uncompetitive or unfair. It wasn't even lost from the start. Let's go back to RM vs Breloom example. Their RM is Steel Tera, your Breloom is Rock Tera. You incorrectly read them as being flying, and lose your Breloom for the misplay. Or you read them as Steel, Mach Punch and keep your Breloom and your Terastalization. Hell, you can even midground and Tera Mach Punch to take Acro and kill Steel Tera. There's a lot of room for play in every step of this scenario.

 

[charlieX7]

Everything that's not in the game should not be an option. Showing your opponent's tera type at team preview is going against game mechanics, and should not be considered. Limiting Pokemon that can terastallize also seems like an unclean solution, since if they're broken after terastallizing then the Pokemon should be banned, not the mechanic. Restricting types is also going against game mechanics and also overly complicated.

Either ban it completely or not at all.

All of those things are possible in the game via "handshake agreements". The majority of Smogon rules tend to avoid direct alteration of the game, but clauses that effectively enforce the agreements are allowed (ex.: OHKO clause, Infinite Game Clause)

edit: also sometimes, in drastic situations, the base game can be minimally changed (ex.: Sleep Clause)

 

[Taliheim]

I should really be approaching this tomorrow with a coffee in hand, but I don't feel like waiting so meh

I don't believe Terastallization is inherently uncompetitive (overpowered, though, possibly.) It can be very easily broken down into a single two-part question, each turn, which itself is an extension of the standard tactical approach: "What does my opponent get out of turning this interaction, and is it worth sacrificing their ability to do so in all future interactions for?" Ultimately, terastallization should only be used in three circumstances; the strategic ("this is what I want to use it for"), the defensive tactical ("this is what I need to use it for"), and the opportunistic/punishing tactical ("this reaps a greater return than the strategic use"). If there's no argument for either three, you can safely write off terastal as a viable option your opponent can take, and if they DO take it, it manifests as a punishable mistake. Strategic/intended uses can be scouted from Team Preview or gameplay patterns, just like any other hidden aspect like movepool, ability selection, or item, and the tactical uses can be picked up on during the developing game in the same way as any other tactical option.

I don't believe the selection of viable teratypes for any given set is problematically high-breadth, either. You don't need to deal with 18 options per pokemon - the practical range is more 1-4 teratypes, most of which cover different contexts and therefore creates avenues for scouting. Not every pokemon on a team will have a viable strategic use for its terastals, either, or get much value out of potential tactical ones.

I'm kinda going all over the place now, so let me try to sum up my important points. The additional breadth Terastal provides is not enough to overwhelm the player's mental stack in addition to the rest of the game. Terastallization is its own opportunity cost, and a notable one at that. Teambuilding and piloting will need to be modified to be overall more robust and tactically-adaptable with less-specialized level 0 gameplans, but it won't sacrifice counterplay or strategy in the process - not a buff or nerf, just different.

All this being said... all of this is null and void if even tactical terastal activations that successfully turn an interaction, consistently lead to checkmate scenarios. If it's power contribution ultimately removes more interactions than its additional contexts create, it absolutely shouldn't stay untouched, and while you shouldn't trust my tongue on this matter, it looks to be the case to me.

Ultimately, I don't believe any of the proposed restrictions would actually do anything meaningful - it should either be allowed, and have future tiering decisions play around it, or be banned outright. I personally want the former, but I'm not really qualified to provide an opinion on whether the latter is needed or not.

--

quick semi-related addendum if you've read this far, but I'm a little worried about the suspect being skewed by subjective voting, by people voting to keep it despite considering it banworthy since they find it super fun, or voting to ban it despite considering it OK since they don't think an OM should be a standard metagame, or things like that. Maybe giving the council the ability to veto a sufficiently close decision with a unanimous vote would be a good idea?

 

[Andyyo]

To preface my opinion on Terastallization, I believe it is far too early to consider any action on the mechanic, regardless of if it is uncompetitive or not. As of the writing of this post, the S/V metagame has existed for only 8 days. And no, this isn't monopolizing the meta for months at a time, I am saying to give it at least 45 days before taking minor action against it, and if that is unsuccessful then banning it.

Anyways, to move into the actions that could be taken against Terastallization, they all have some fundamental flaws, though a few are decent enough despite that.

1) Banning Tera Blast
A horrible option. Very few mons rely on Tera Blast for coverage and is generally a bad move if that mon doesn't Terastallize, so this accomplishes almost nothing.

2) Limit Pokemon to only using a Tera Type that matches one of their STABS
An okay option, except now almost all of the defensive benefits of the mechanic are now gone. Some would argue that the defensive benefits are the more ban-worthy benefits of the mechanic, and I would argue that the strength of the offensive benefits are even greater, most notably currently seen by Dragapult, Roaring Moon, and the now-banned Palafin.

3) Limit which Pokemon have access to Terastallization on each team
Probably the best solution, though one that opens a up a lot of discussions and would be quite awkward as a gentleman's agreement for hypothetical cart players.

4) Show each Pokemon's Tera Type at Team Preview
If any option is chosen, I would choose this one. It takes out the guessing game of what Tera Types the other team has, and places a greater focus on prediction which mon will Terastallize and a which time. However, I do have disagreements with this approach. Like solution 3, it is quite awkward for anyone to hypothetically replicate on cart. My serious gripe is that it reveals information that is supposed to be hidden from the opponent in Team Preview.

As for my opinion on the matter, Terastallization should not be banned currently. The reality of the situation, is that you do not have to make 108 guesses as to what the opposing team has as their Tera Types. Most mons would have at most 2-4 different types they would even want to change to, most probably only 1, and this will likely shrink even more as the meta develops. This can already be seen on several mons in the tier already. Dragonite will currently run Normal if it runs Extreme Speed, otherwise it will run Steel so it can gain a resist to both Fairy and Ice type moves. Slither Wing is overwhelmingly likely to run Bug to boost its First Impression or Fighting for Close Combat, with maybe 1:100 running Flying or Ground for coverage. Kingambit is basically guaranteed to be running Ghost to dodge Fighting moves.

There are significantly more examples even now, but my point being is that what types a mon is going to want to change into are very obvious if you know what it's strengths and weaknesses are, because it will change to a type that either bolsters it's strengths or diminishes it's weaknesses. You don't have to prepare for Tera Bug Dragonite for the same reason you don't have to prepare for Body Slam Dragonite. If Terastallization breaks a mon, you ban that mon. It is significantly unlikely that more than a very small handful of mons abuse Terastallization to the point that they required to be banned. For a hypothetical example, a bulky Volcarona set running Tera Grass and Giga Drain has quite different counters than Volcarona regularly does, however it's new typing invites new counters or even allows overlapping counters to shine greater, giving Volcarona an increased amount of depth while still being able to be accounted for with strategic play or changes in the meta and teambuilding. Furthermore, if it does get banned, nothing is reasonably stopping allowing mons banned because of Terastallization back into the meta, see the discussion around the Shedninja banning in Natdex.

And while this shouldn't really have any impact on whether the mechanic should be banned or not, I would like to point out that banning Terastallization is broadly unpopular within the wider non-competitive Pokemon audience. We saw a similar reaction with Dynamax, a mechanic that I and most other competitive players believe, was something that deserved to be banned. It was such big news that Smogon banned a mainline mechanic that several news publications reported on it, and the reception outside of Smogon wasn't positive in all places. As Lily pointed out in her post on the matter, it could be argued that it led to a decrease in the amount of people playing in OU compared to Gen 7. And Terastallization is at least on paper significantly weaker than Dynamaxing, as well as Dynamax being generally less liked by even casual players due to how lazy it seemed as a mechanic. Banning another main mechanic in a row, especially so soon into the metagame, is likely to draw the ire of non-Smogon players. Because of the reputation that has to be upheld of Smogon as consistent in their rulings of creating a competitive environment, I would argue that at the very least, banning Terastallization should only happen after exhausting all other options.

 

[Reviews2D]

In what way is building your check to be able to check the mon abusing a mechanic? This is a pretty basic way to use it, and one that can be seen from a mile away. The fact that you can build a pokemon to check certain mons and their Tera types by using your own is not abusing it. It's a mechanic designed to be used both offensively and defensively. It comes down to who uses their tools better. In that same Breloom vs RM scenario, if you read it to be a Steel Tera you can preserve your own Tera and KO with Mach Punch. You don't need to use Tera to beat Tera, you just need to have an idea what types a pokemon are good at using, and what types help the team most, both things we'd get better at as the meta develops.

It's a manner of how terra reduces overall counter, it's not a matter of what the type will be since mons already have preferred types by this point it's more so when and which. Anyone can flip a match up on it's head to gain a major advantage so the best way to handle this is in the team builder. i.e RM comes in on an Iron Valiant that KO'd a mon and seems to be choiced. You know that's going to terra into steel or other type but how many mons can actually switch into RM after it set up and handle it? Their are similar scenarios with Terra Dragonite or other set up sweepers, they come in on a mon set up, terra, and at least leave a hole in the other team. The issue is that there will only be a few realistic options that like be able to handle these threats or the threats that will be overbearing that they will constrict teambuilding. This could make the tier more stale due to this mechanic that necessitates certain mons even though they would probably run only a handful of types anyway.

 

[Avira]

Ruft in the Policy Review section put forth a good way to test Terastal with a longer testing process with a less restrictive nerf followed by a more restrictive nerf if the less restrictive nerf is not enough to make Terastal balanced. I feel it's a must read, and I will link it here: https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/terastallization-tiering-discussion.3711464/#post-9412947

The less restrictive nerf can be showing every Pokemon's Tera type at Team Preview, and if top players still find it broken because there are way too many Pokemon and variables to prep for, then they can move forward with limiting Terastal to one Pokemon per team and revealing what the Tera type is, which is maximally restricting.

I am ADAMANT that limiting Terastallization to original typings only SHOULD NOT be pursued because it goes against why Terastal was even introduced as a mechanic in the first place.

For the record, I want the Terastal mechanic to be completely banned as I do not believe it is conducive to a competitive metagame, but given it is the defining mechanic of the generation, I believe a longer testing process, as Ruft has proposed, is the best way for Smogon to show that it gave Terastal a fair shake. While Terastal is not as powerful as Dynamax was, it is also not straight up inferior to Dynamax as the ability to change your typing on the fly while also retaining your original STAB(s) is extremely powerful.

I believe it's better to ban a handful or 2 handfus of Pokemon along with Terastal rather than keep Terastal and ban 20-40 Pokemon instead since Smogon aims for the least number of bans to ensure the competitiveness of a meta.

 

[bogglywoods]

Once again prefacing this with the statement that I do not think putting a band-aid on the problem with minor regulations for something as bad as terastalizing is a good idea, but good lord, the conversation on "cartridge accuracy" for telling the opponent your tera type should've been over before the thread even began. It's literally the biggest non-issue when it comes to the discussion of the mechanic and the possibility of restricting it, and acting like Sleep Clause or even the Ubers/OU/UU/etc. tiering system would be any different is grasping at straws at best. I feel like it'd be a lot more worthwhile if everyone could just discuss the issue at hand instead of every meaningful post being footnoted with a random comment about the semantics of cartridge accuracy or whatever. even if i'm contributing to that same footnoting myself now

 

[bdov]

I’ll keep it short and simple:

I don’t think Terrastallization should be restricted or banned in any way.

Reasons:
1.) The mechanic is not game breaking nor meta defining

There. Now let me explain.

most people just assume that if something is hard to predict or hard to play around, then it’s broken and should be banned, but that’s not true. There is a BIG difference between the two and that difference is precisely why I think terra is actually a healthy mechanic.

Let’s say for example: As the meta has evolved you see a Dragonite on team preview. Immediately you think of two terra types: Normal and Flying. Why? Because based on your knowledge of the state of the meta and what Dragonites movepool can take advantage of, these are the types that best suit it

So yes, you may not know exactly what type they will be in each mon, but you can have a good idea based on what the mon is and what their team comp looks like. And if you play knowing these things and what opportunities look like good ones to terra, then you can play around it.

Finally to those who think that they can just go a random type and somehow beat you even if the type has nothing to do with the mon or set, I think you need to reevaluate how you play. First thing I think when a mon comes in and nobody has terra’d is: can this mon turn into any type that could be really bad for my team. If yes, then what, and how do I play around that? Over time as a meta develops, I truly do believe people will see this is not only a competitive thought process but also one that shows how terra is not broken and helps competitive as a whole. Maybe you need to think a little more and not just click buttons carelessly in a terra meta, but doesn’t that just prove that terra is competitive and healthy?

Conclusion:
I truly believe Terastallization is a healthy and competitive mechanic.
Do NOT ban it until players can properly adapt to a meta and thought process with it existing.

 

[bogglywoods]

Is there any reason why Tera Blast ban is even being considered btw? Don't think I've ever seen a single Pokemon running it, let alone abusing it.

 

[Reviews2D]

Is there any reason why Tera Blast ban is even being considered btw? Don't think I've ever seen a single Pokemon running it, let alone abusing it.

The move is nothing special and most mons have better moves for terra stab or they just terra for a defensive befit

 

[Gondre19Wedj]

Is there any reason why Tera Blast ban is even being considered btw? Don't think I've ever seen a single Pokemon running it, let alone abusing it.

If I remember correctly, in Gen8 Nat Dex, Pult was banned because getting a physical ghost move in the form of a z-move became too much for the meta. Not being restricted to Phantom Force was a huge buff for it. I think Pult becomes a lot more deadly (not necessarily banworthy) with tera blast ghost.
I could also see ice and electric types running it for bolt beam coverage, something that I've been trying a little and it works decently well.
Tbh, I really don't think it's ban worthy. The community managed HP for 6 generations.

 

[MasterTotoro]

I don't think I have seen anyone mention this, but in VGC open team sheets have been very common in Sword/Shield tournaments, especially online ones (ex: Players Cup which is an official tournament held by The Pokémon Company International). This means each player knows their opponent's mons, items, abilities, and moves. Players suspect the reason for this was to reduce cheating by players trying to change their team in-between matches (you can't do this in VGC). Presumably these tournaments would also make players include Tera types on their team sheets this generation. People saying that option 1 violates cartridge makes no sense when official tournaments do essentially the same thing.

 

[NabboCheTesta]

I probably won't be very original but:

My two cents are that with time and the input of tournament-level players Tera will become more and more problematic as more sets emerge that can threaten to flip the table on the opponent even when their Tera type is telegraphed and most importantly without compromising their basic functionalities, so I think that showing Tera types at team preview could be far less effective in the future than it might be right now.

Restricting Tera types to the user's natural types and allowing only one team member to Terastallise would at least mitigate this problem, but at that point the mechanic would barely resemble the original.
I don't think it'd necessarily be a deal breaker, Smogon have heavily altered the workings of other uncompetitive aspects (e.g. Sleep) before, but at least IMO such an approach wouldn't be justifiable unless such a heavily customized version of the mechanic was to bring a clear benefit to competitive play when compared to simply banning it, which I'm not sure either of the discussed alternatives would, especially the former.

With that being said, I think the mechanic is a lot of fun when the stakes aren't quite as high and for me it would be a shame if there was no place to play with it enabled at all. So in the end I think that banning tera altogether in standard play and supporting a coexisting stack of metagames with unrestricted Tera á la NatDex would eventually be a good solution.

 

[Gondre19Wedj]

Restricting Tera types to the user's natural types and allowing only one team member to Terastallise would at least mitigate this problem, but at that point the mechanic would barely resemble the original.

With that being said, I think the mechanic is a lot of fun when the stakes aren't quite as high and for me it would be a shame if there was no place to play with it enabled at all. So in the end I think that banning tera altogether in standard play and supporting a coexisting stack of metagames with unrestricted Tera á la NatDex would eventually be a good solution.

I think Finch has said that there could be an OM created if tera was banned. Smogon just doesn't have the resources to support another official ladder for tera and keep the official OU non tera ladder running.
As for restricting tera types to stab, imo that just goes against the spirit of the mechanic and I think I'd rather see it banned than go to that solution. IMO of course.

 

[Bold School]

It still floors me when I see people pretending Dynamax was the worst thing ever yet the more broken Terastallizing mechanic is somehow not as bad, let alone unbroken and fine. How is a mechanic with more versatility than we've ever seen before, less restrictions than we've ever seen before, and opportunity cost free Protean/Adaptability boost in the most hyper offensive meta we've ever seen less broken than anything else? It's simply not. People are sweeping with like a Tera change and a turn of set up in a lot of cases. Sometimes no set up if it's a priority sweep. It's besides the point of this thread, but it genuinely bothers me that people are underselling the sheer offensive threat level of Tera.

I'm also still wondering where all the "far too early" people were in gen 8 with Dynamax. (This is rhetorical in case you couldn't tell.) All I know is it felt like there were a lot more people who hated Dynamax and wanted it gone as soon as possible than we are seeing now where we rather conveniently seem to have a lot of calls for more time and patience. Like we need more time to tell and we cant know yet and if it turns out... I gotta be blunt here, we can kinda already tell. If you've run any calcs you know what the damage outputs can be here, and you've played a few games and seen some of that in action, you can pretty much tell more or less how much offensive firepower we are in for once the meta really settles in and we find an even stronger overall lineup of abusers. And that amount of firepower is quite a bit.

The bottom line is this: Double STAB modifier x Ability modifier x Item modifier = silly damage with no restrictions

Until that issue is solved, Tera will never not be too broken to fix. I do like the idea of Tera preview, but again, you got to do something about Double STAB + Item nonsense if you want any hope of anything remotely salvageable. Yes, this is complex ban territory. But none of these half measures will work without touching that issue, and many of the suggestions here for a compromise would do more harm than good.